Beyond Compliance to Wellbeing and Belonging in Course Design

Gloria Doherty, Director of Digital Learning at George Fox University

Gloria Doherty, Director of Digital Learning at George Fox University

Online education has slowly evolved in demonstrating its efficacy. The advent of the first learning management systems demonstrated that online learners could create authentic communities. The global sweep of Massively Open Online Courses (MOOCs) demonstrated that if we build it, they will come, they will browse, and they will leave if there is no interaction that produces accountability through sustained engagement. Most recently, in the shuttering of local classrooms, while pivoting to digital communication solutions during the global pandemic response, we witnessed misconceptions and missteps in attempts to transfer traditional residential classroom instruction to online learning. This transition is not simply transactional. We learned that substantive interaction is a complex design that every learning community needs in order to thrive. Teams of content matter experts, instructional designers, educational technologists, and assessment experts invite us into the complexity of understanding how humans learn, how learners can be supported in demonstrating their learning, and how educational institutions can authenticate the mastery achieved by their students and the relevance of that mastery for their careers. Our work continues to evolve.

We are keenly aware that Higher Education is now called to differentiate Regular and Substantive Interaction (RSI) from correspondence learning. From Department of Education Dear Colleague letters to accreditation standards, we have been prompted to consider what it means to authentically engage students in meaningful and productive interaction in online learning spaces. We are challenged to invest more intent and creativity in mentoring students through the nuances of personal, academic, and civil engagement. The good news is that each school has the agency to exercise its unique interpretation of interaction and how its RSI contributes to student success.

How does RSI move us beyond compliance to turn our focus to the more compelling goal of supporting well-being and belonging? In missional terms, what does it mean to belong, to be known? This question can challenge faculty and staff to focus on students first. The result may be a commitment to preserve a faculty-to-student ratio that demands more resources but can achieve interactions where students are drawn to invest themselves in collaborating with peers and faculty. One tangible outcome of this effort is an increase in students reporting that they experience a sense of belonging in the learning community. They understand that faculty care about their goals and struggles because faculty are fully present in the learning event. Another outcome is that faculty can write letters of recommendation that express deeper insight because they truly know their students. In terms of assessment, the most powerful outcome we could hope to achieve is to move beyond compliance and grow into a culture of well-being and belonging for every student, faculty, and staff member.

"Substantive interaction is a complex design that every learning community needs in order to thrive"

Faculty, students, and staff experience improved administrative and academic outcomes when they are united in a continuous assessment process. Their collaborative work uncovers opportunities for more effective course design. For example, in the survey, students report that they need more clarity in understanding learning outcomes and how to proceed in achieving those outcomes. If students are informed about program learning outcomes and how coursework contributes to building competencies, those students will more accurately hit the target. When students are given a clear understanding of the relevance and scale of an assignment, followed by procedural details and support, those students gain confidence, which increases their motivation. When the assignment design provides flexibility in student choice, students can take on the challenge of exercising personal agency to more authentically and effectively express their learning.

Courses become more equitable when we employ multiple methods of organization and user experience. For example, students need flexibility in order to accommodate complex life schedules. We need to continue to do the hard work of designing asynchronous learning as the framework while adding synchronous options. The higher goal is to give students agency to exercise communication skills that take advantage of their strengths but also provide an opportunity to build confidence in developing new communication skills. Course design is best done in teams to allow multiple views of the design to integrate and produce interconnecting paths that effectively support more students. Take one lens—the perspective of course site accessibility—and experience how this lens uncovers hidden challenges that an informed team can address, resulting in a course site that says to the student, “We know you. We have prepared this space for you.”

Before opening the doors to an online course, we can test its ability to encourage well-being and belonging by asking, “Will each student find themselves represented in texts selected in assessments designed for this course? Will they be invited to exercise choice in fulfilling assignments? Will they be guided in exercising personal integrity and expressing respect for their learning community in all interactions?” Our understanding of learning continues to evolve. Let’s bring everyone on the journey.

Learning Management